Does the troubled families initiative undermine localism?

Is the troubled families scheme undermining localism? Photograph: Karen Robinson for the Guardian

The government's troubled families initiative aims to tackle families with multiple needs by removing red tape and allowing agencies to work together, sharing data and information to nip problems in the bud.

Questions about how councils will be paid, who gets to decide what 'troubled' really means and how the project will be funded have all be raised. But the biggest concern at the heart of objections to Louise Casey's scheme is the feeling that it shifts the balance of power firmly back into central government hands.

Councils will be paid according to criteria set out by government departments. They must meet pre-determined targets and will only be paid once they do, in a payment-by-results style agreement. Although some funding will be distributed upfront, authorities are worried that it won't be sufficient to tackle the problems they face.

Casey has already admitted that securing agreement from numerous government departments on the direction and scope of the project was no easy task, raising more questions about who will really be pulling the strings.

Councils have been promised the biggest devolution in power from Westminster back to town halls in decades, so does the troubled families initiative undermine that aim? Or are some areas of policy simply too big to hand over to individual authorities?

Let us know what you think in our poll and share your thoughts under the article.